A Re-Examination of the Warren Commission Findings
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A RE-EXAMINATION OF THE WARREN COMMISSION FINDINGS: A MINORITY REPORT Participants: JACOB COHEN, historian, author of the article "The Missing Documents" PENN JONES, editor, the Midlothian Mirror, and author of "Forgive My Grief" MARK LANE, attorney, and author of "Rush to Judgment'! LEO SAUVAGE, correspondent for Le Figaro, and author of "The Oswald Affair" HAROLD WEISBERG, author of "Whitewash: The Report on the Warren Report" Moderator: JIM BISHOP, syndicated columnist, and author of the forthcoming book "The Day Kennedy Was Shot" Credits: Produced by Mel Baily Directed by Arthur Forrest Associate to the Producer: Paul Noble Recorded August 30, 1966 Telecast November 12, 1966, 9:00 P.M., h'NEW-TV, New York A Public Affairs Production of WNEW-TV, Metropolitan Broadcasting Televison, A Division of Metromedia, Inc. (c) Metromedia, Inc., 1966 SCHOENBRUN: I'm David Schoenbrun. History sometimes does repeat itself. A century ago a great American president was assassinated. There was no mystery about the assassin. John Wilkes Booth stood upon the stage and fired at Abraham Lincoln in the full, horrified view of hundreds of spectators. Yet, controversy over the assassination, whether it was or was not a plot rather than the act of a single madman, broke out at once and has never ceased right up to our day. Some three years ago another great American President was shot down. This time the assassin was not caught in the act, but Lee Oswald was arrested quickly and charged with the murder. Inevitably, as in the case of Lincoln, suspicion swiftly grew that there was a plot. A Presidential Commission was established to investigate all the facts, a distinguished Commission of eminent citizens and authorities, headed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, to dispel any further doubts that the truth would be found. And yet, as in the case of John Wilkes Booth controversy still rages over whether or not Lee Oswald was lone madman. Several books have appeared and several of the country's leading periodicals have seriously questioned the findings of the Warren Commission report -- and even its conclusions. Consistent with our self-imposed obligation to inform the public, we believe that the controversy over the Warren Report should be aired for the many thousands of citizens who have not studied the Commission's report or the charges of those critics who dissent from its conclusions. Members of the Commission and staff were invited to take part in the discussions you are about to see. They did not accept that first invitation. When producti of this program was completed and plans made to televise it, the Commission was informed and proffered a second invitation to participate in a follow-up program. We have now received several acceptances, and there will be a subsequent program presenting the opinions of those who support the findings of the Warren Report. But first this discussion by its critics, moderated by Jim Bishop. Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Bishop. BISHOP: This ladies and gentlemen is an array of authors. As you know, an author is a person with a knowledge of words who enjoys inflicting his opinions on others. One of the blessings of the writer is that he is a trained professional observer. This particular group has something in common. Each has read and digested the ten million four hundred thousand words of the Warren Commission Report. This is the one which inquired into the assassination of President John F. Kennedy at Dallas on November 22, 1963. The Report found that a young malcontent, Lee Harvey Oswald, alone and with no conspirators, shot and killed the President. The authois have allegated to themselves the right to inquire into the accuracy of the Warren Commission Report. You might expect that a group of scribblers presented with the same assortment of facts would arrive at the same conclusion. This is not so. All of the men around me have written tracts disagreeing in part with the Warren Commission Report. Some see it as a skein of contradictions and lies. Others point at testimony which is not included in the report. Some believe that Lee Harvey Oswald did not shoot the President. I'm the only writer present who has not published his findings. It will be completed in two years and will be called "The Day Kennedy Was Shot". I am also the only writer here who agrees with the Warren Commission Report as it stands. I think that Oswald shot the President as casually as a boy in an empty lot might pick off a tin can. This makes me a minority of one. (Johnson quote over credits) 2. BISHOP: I would like to introduce the members of the panel who sit here with me this evening. On my extreme left is Mr. Penn Jones, Editor of the Midlothian Mirror in Texas, and the author of "FORGIVE MY GRIEF". Harold Weisberg, author of "WHITEWASH". Mark Lane, attorney and author of "RUSH TO JUDGMENT". Jacob Cohen, author of "THE'MISSING DOCUMENTS", and he is now writing a book defending the Warren Commission Report.. Now I think we should open with a little free and easy conversation. Penn Jones, give us your feelings. PENN JONES: Jim, I have been guilty of saying that the only way you can believe the Warren Report is to not read it, and that's really what America did. I'm happy to be on this panel, where now we have two who are willing to defend the report. I think it's awfully important that we as newsmen and the news media of this nation impress upon the American public the importance to read, not only the report,but the test- imony regardless of how much time it takes. BISHOP: And it certainly takes a lot of time, I can tell you. Mr. Sauvage. SAUVAGE: I have summed up in the last chapter of my book the eight quotes given by the Commission and I'm glad, glad that they are discussed now here for the first time in public in television. So each point will come up and will be discussed by us, but what I would like to add is that in this century and in this country, nobody should have the right to ask us to take anything on faith. We are entitled to discuss, and we are entitled to ask for proof. That, I believe is the main point. 3. BISHOP: That's a good one too. Mr. Weisberg? WEISBERG: My book WHITEWASH, the report on the Warren Report is restricted entirely to the Commission's official information and its report to which it is extensively referenced so you can keep me honest. It's the conclusion that the expected job has not been done and must be entirely in public, and preferably by Congress. In order to reach this conclusion I had to, in effect, destroy all the major conclusions of the report. This I did, I believe, entirely with the Commission's own evidence by showing how the Commission ignored witnesses and evidences, manufactured evidence, destroyed evidence, I mean lit erally destroyed. BISHOP: These are very grave charges. Hr. Lane. LANE: This is the Warren Commission Report when it was handed to President Johnson in September of 1964. He held it on nationwide television and said, "It's very heavy", which indeed may go down in hisotry as the finest short analysis of the report. For when the 26 volumes on which this report was allegedly based were released, it became clear that not a single basic conclusion of the Warren Commission could be substantiated by their actual findings. The Commission's conclusion that Oswald was the assassin is not compelling and cannot be reached upon what the Commission discovered. Its conclusion that one man alone killed President Kennedy is ludicrous and is rebutted by the known facts. Of course, there is more evidence. There is evidence in the National Archives which is classified and by order of Lyndon Johnson may not be seen until September of the year 2,039. I 4. think this is the imposition of consensus from above,the very antithesis of democracy. I think that if there is anything that we can all agree this evening, any one single fact is that the Archives should be opened up and that the material should be made available to the American people. BISHOP: Mr. Cohen. COHEN: Well, I'mgoing/Vant to make a comment about, just about everything Mr. Lane has said in the course of the evening, but I do want to make clear, that by and large I am a defender of the Commission, and what I defend, rather what I am convinced by, is that there is one and only one assassin. His name is Lee Harvey Oswald, and I might add that there was only one Lee Harvey Oswald. I do not defend the Commission against the charge that in some of its joints, it is rusty, and that some of the report is carelessly argued. In fact, I shall be pointing out that there are documents which the Commission never saw which are pivotal in its arguments and, if they were made public now, could effectively verify or silence some of the theories of some of my colleagues here. Also, let me say one other thing. I am the only defender of the Commission on this panel of five. The name of this program is "A Minority Report". The concept of the program is precisely that, it has mounted the minority report against the Warren report. Now, I don't want my ability to handle these five zealous gentlemen to be mistaken for whatever authority there is in the Warren report.